Professional Equality

[KingGuin]

First things first fellow Scribblies - Happy New Year. The forum has been quiet of late so herewith food for thought.

I am the only Serviceman on a local CIPD course. At first I was bemused by the flowery civilian language and the rigorous and respectful approach to administration. However, over the past few months, it has gradually dawned on me that the gulf between the Service and Civilian attitudes to HR Admin is huge.

Whilst as a trade, on the whole, we do a great job wherever and at whatever; I do not believe that we seriously have the respect of other trades. Of course we get a well done when we work a comp or PT but the several threads of abuse/banter which greeted our impending pay rise would suggest not.

Playing devils advocate. Can we really e.g. take an OC PMS/OC PSF seriously if they do not hold a professional HR qualification? OK a BSC/BA (Hons) is creditable but is it relevant? - and if we are honest there are, IMHO, very few Pers Support officers whose first choice was Admin! We have a system where personnel are empowered because of rank (and by default experience) but when measured against those holding (for arguments sake) a degree in aeronautical engineering can they remain creditable without qualification?

Thoughts?

PS

I do have a cunning plan but await your responses.

 

[Bucc Boy]

First things first fellow Scribblies - Happy New Year. The forum has been quiet of late so herewith food for thought.

I am the only Serviceman on a local CIPD course. At first I was bemused by the flowery civilian language and the rigorous and respectful approach to administration. However, over the past few months, it has gradually dawned on me that the gulf between the Service and Civilian attitudes to HR Admin is huge.

Whilst as a trade, on the whole, we do a great job wherever and at whatever; I do not believe that we seriously have the respect of other trades. Of course we get a well done when we work a comp or PT but the several threads of abuse/banter which greeted our impending pay rise would suggest not.

Playing devils advocate. Can we really e.g. take an OC PMS/OC PSF seriously if they do not hold a professional HR qualification? OK a BSC/BA (Hons) is creditable but is it relevant? - and if we are honest there are, IMHO, very few Pers Support officers whose first choice was Admin! We have a system where personnel are empowered because of rank (and by default experience) but when measured against those holding (for arguments sake) a degree in aeronautical engineering can they remain creditable without qualification?

Thoughts?

PS

I do have a cunning plan but await your responses.

I have to admire and respect your honest and straight forward ‘doubts’ as to the qualifications held by the Forces HR managers. However, if it helps your question and therefore your trades credibility, I suspect the same could be said for OC accounts, OC supply, OC catering……etc.etc.

Your highlighting of an engineering degree, while still valid doesn’t IMHO distance the EngO’s to far from their officer mates in HR though. The majority of engineers perceive their bosses as ‘Managers’ and little more. As my time in the Service has increased, I’ve become more and more aware of the fact that the officer field are, without hands on experience, basically man managers and basically a waste of fcuking space!!

 

[snowball1]

I have to admire and respect your honest and straight forward ‘doubts’ as to the qualifications held by the Forces HR managers. However, if it helps your question and therefore your trades credibility, I suspect the same could be said for OC accounts, OC supply, OC catering……etc.etc.

Your highlighting of an engineering degree, while still valid doesn’t IMHO distance the EngO’s to far from their officer mates in HR though. The majority of engineers perceive their bosses as ‘Managers’ and little more. As my time in the Service has increased, I’ve become more and more aware of the fact that the officer field are, without hands on experience, basically man managers and basically a waste of fcuking space!!

Most OC Supply's have a logistics degree.

 

[Bucc Boy]

Most OC Supply's have a logistics degree.

I'll get me coat then!

 

[John Lloyd]

Most OC Supply's have a logistics degree.

Find a box, store a box, move a box. Piece of p1ss!

 

[8:15fromOdium]

KingGuin, I am interested in what you think of the CIPD qual. I did one recently and was very disappointed by the quality of support and what they were delivering.
My initial impression of the CIPD (compared to the other professional body I am a member of) is it is a money making organisation rather than a professional support org. I am, of course, happy to be corrected so would be interested in the views of others.

 

[KingGuin]

8:15, I too am a member of the "other" organisation and have been for a while. Only been involved with the CIPD for 5 months and I cannot yet present an informed opinion. However, my initial impressions have been positive although I would suggest CIPD presents as somewhat self serving and a tadge self important - oh and their literature if fricking pricy! Nonetheless I did enjoy the Conference: some good speakers and gen to be had. In regard to what I have learned so far, very theory based and a great emphasis on legislation, however my civy class mates are getting very excited and assure me it is a true reflection of "real life

Now can you send me all your beautifully written assignments? TaDT_Xtremez_30:

 

[PSFbeatch]

First things first fellow Scribblies - Happy New Year. The forum has been quiet of late so herewith food for thought.

I am the only Serviceman on a local CIPD course. At first I was bemused by the flowery civilian language and the rigorous and respectful approach to administration. However, over the past few months, it has gradually dawned on me that the gulf between the Service and Civilian attitudes to HR Admin is huge.

Whilst as a trade, on the whole, we do a great job wherever and at whatever; I do not believe that we seriously have the respect of other trades. Of course we get a well done when we work a comp or PT but the several threads of abuse/banter which greeted our impending pay rise would suggest not.

Playing devils advocate. Can we really e.g. take an OC PMS/OC PSF seriously if they do not hold a professional HR qualification? OK a BSC/BA (Hons) is creditable but is it relevant? - and if we are honest there are, IMHO, very few Pers Support officers whose first choice was Admin! We have a system where personnel are empowered because of rank (and by default experience) but when measured against those holding (for arguments sake) a degree in aeronautical engineering can they remain creditable without qualification?

Thoughts?

PS

I do have a cunning plan but await your responses.

I'm a SAC and I have a CIPD CPP!

 

[Kernow]

I'm a SAC and I have a CIPD CPP!

What do you want a Blue Peter Badge

 

[TDJ]

First things first fellow Scribblies - Happy New Year. The forum has been quiet of late so herewith food for thought.

I am the only Serviceman on a local CIPD course. At first I was bemused by the flowery civilian language and the rigorous and respectful approach to administration. However, over the past few months, it has gradually dawned on me that the gulf between the Service and Civilian attitudes to HR Admin is huge.

Whilst as a trade, on the whole, we do a great job wherever and at whatever; I do not believe that we seriously have the respect of other trades. Of course we get a well done when we work a comp or PT but the several threads of abuse/banter which greeted our impending pay rise would suggest not.

Playing devils advocate. Can we really e.g. take an OC PMS/OC PSF seriously if they do not hold a professional HR qualification? OK a BSC/BA (Hons) is creditable but is it relevant? - and if we are honest there are, IMHO, very few Pers Support officers whose first choice was Admin! We have a system where personnel are empowered because of rank (and by default experience) but when measured against those holding (for arguments sake) a degree in aeronautical engineering can they remain creditable without qualification?

Thoughts?

PS

I do have a cunning plan but await your responses.

Quite agree KG - however, I would go as far as saying that a professional HR qual should not be just restricted to PSF/PMS - but also to the Chf Clks and SNCOs, can we really take them seriously if they also do not have a professional qualification??. In this way there should some definable HR career path - perhaps even a small sub branch/specialisation requiring a professional qual. I also note that out of all of the branches and trades the admin trade and branch is one which does not offer credible learning experience (paid for by the RAF) for the HR stream - now that ios food for thought. Is the Branch/trade embraced within the spirit of IIP.

 

[KingGuin]

I'm a SAC and I have a CIPD CPP!

Firstly, welcome back beatch - I've not seen you post for a while. Well done for getting the CPP (I'm doing the Post Grad version) - do you think that it is more worthwhile than the NVQ/Apprenticeship the trainees get? Have you been able to utilise any of your learning in the workplace?

 

[chiefy]

Can I just interject as an ex engineer, whose degree is in Maths and now works in Project Management. I also hold both the CPP and CTP from CIPD (degree in abbreviations is next!) and consider them not worth wiping my arse with! I completed them purely to assist me in my consultancy role when I analyse peoples jobs.

How much of the true HR role does the service equivalent actually carry out, especially with the outsourcing of pay and pensions? I'm certainly not convinced that military HR requires anywhere near the level of training my HR department have for example, other than for personal development and future employment. My HR department recruit, employ and deal with employment law and issues. They also calculate tax, NI and pension contributions, they deal with internal training, H&S, procurement of the company car fleet and the maintenance of that contract, the same for IT equipment and a host of other roles I have probably never even thought about, when I phone them with a problem be it with the company car, an employee, my pension, tax etc I get a phone call several days later with the solution....... simple because they are equipped, resourced and empowered to deal with it all within my organisation.

This isn't a dig at your HR role which is defined by the service and you all seem to be fairly good at that, but simply the basis for a few questions:
How would a HR clerk ever get the experience to complete any significant HR qualification other than purely theoretical? Is it in the service's interest to train people for a role they are never going to fully use except when it suits their terminal CV? Surely carrying out the training in house, tailored to the needs of the job is more appropriate?

 

[3wheeledtechie]

Excuse my 2p worth on an admin thread, but would holding key appointments holding a certain qualification be a good idea to gain more respect from contemporaries? I believe this was the question. Yes is the answer, but it'll take a long time to change attitudes. Certainly it helps techies to progress to Sgt and beyond to hold at least HNC. Is it essential? No the service provides adequate training, but it shows you got off your arse and tried to better yourself if you have it.

In the same way if 50% or more of the admin trade FS and above help CIPD or whatever professional qual is appropriate, admin officers I bet would be falling over themselves to get the same, as well as more junior NCOs who wanted to progress.
Maybe the extension of the QA system to the admin arena will be a good idea in this respect, as best practice will be informed by current thinking in the leading civilian professional bodies.

 

[KingGuin]

I had hoped to generate debate and am pleased to see this is so. Chiefy, as ever, your response is measured and considered - thanks. Interesting points and nicely illustrating the way I believe my trade should progress. It may be of interest to note that multiskilling (try not to laugh techies!) has been muted as the next logical step for administrators in that Medics/MT/Admin merge at SNCO level given broadly their roles and responsibilities are similar (not my quote). Nonetheless I would argue that Personnel Support, in the broader sense, undertake the roles of contracting, recruiting, H&S etc etc, just not centrally.

I too am currently Project Managing but have found elements of the CIPD useful in my everyday work - managing change, reward and motivation etc etc. My trade is already depleted and suffers from retention issues and I feel the introduction of a recognised and relevant qualification would not only enhance our professional standing but encourage personal development. That aside I believe there is scope to embrace modern HR (Waddington have done so to a large extent) techniques and improve our skill set and service.

 

[KingGuin]

Excuse my 2p worth on an admin thread, but would holding key appointments holding a certain qualification be a good idea to gain more respect from contemporaries? I believe this was the question. Yes is the answer, but it'll take a long time to change attitudes. Certainly it helps techies to progress to Sgt and beyond to hold at least HNC. Is it essential? No the service provides adequate training, but it shows you got off your arse and tried to better yourself if you have it.

In the same way if 50% or more of the admin trade FS and above help CIPD or whatever professional qual is appropriate, admin officers I bet would be falling over themselves to get the same, as well as more junior NCOs who wanted to progress.
Maybe the extension of the QA system to the admin arena will be a good idea in this respect, as best practice will be informed by current thinking in the leading civilian professional bodies.

3wheeled its not often you and I agree lol but good points, well presented. In regard to QA I concur wholeheartedly which is why my Unit have a QA TG17 post and in conjuction with QCIT, have subjected many an admin process (for the better) to the rigours of QA.

 

[chiefy]

I had hoped to generate debate and am pleased to see this is so. Chiefy, as ever, your response is measured and considered - thanks. Interesting points and nicely illustrating the way I believe my trade should progress. It may be of interest to note that multiskilling (try not to laugh techies!) has been muted as the next logical step for administrators in that Medics/MT/Admin merge at SNCO level given broadly their roles and responsibilities are similar (not my quote). Nonetheless I would argue that Personnel Support, in the broader sense, undertake the roles of contracting, recruiting, H&S etc etc, just not centrally.

I too am currently Project Managing but have found elements of the CIPD useful in my everyday work - managing change, reward and motivation etc etc. My trade is already depleted and suffers from retention issues and I feel the introduction of a recognised and relevant qualification would not only enhance our professional standing but encourage personal development. That aside I believe there is scope to embrace modern HR (Waddington have done so to a large extent) techniques and improve our skill set and service.

If multi-skilling is a step too far is there not scope to better manage careers in such a way that people can gain the necessary experience on a route through promotion? There are advantages to both the service and the individual; the service gains financially by only training to an appropriate level but that training is recognised and credible, the individual gains by developing profesional recognition and having challenges to retain interest. It can also serve as a retention tool to an extent. Ultimately Chartered Status Membership of CIPD could perhaps be the aim via the post grad cert at F/S level. (I'm guessing, it may well be Sgt level)

Completely agree about the quals (CPP and CTP) and I didn't mean to infer I didn't learn anything from them, the knowledge has proved useful. However they are really early career quals so for me they aren't worth putting on the CV and were done as part of resettlement, I'd suggest the same would apply to any middle aged manager (whether balding and slightly overweight or not DT_Xtremez_15 They are a step into HR or a good foundation in civvy HR for anyone pursuing organisational, strategic or indeed project management from a service background.

 

[busby1971]

Are we HR

Are we HR

I'm strung between goals here, I feel that retention, personal development and future employability would be heightened by having a civilian recognised qualification and membership of a recognised body. In fact I intend to do the CPP as a part of my resettlement; whilst I know this is an entry level qualification I feel it would add some recognition to my CV.

As far as trade relevant qualification goes I find CIPD to be a bit of an irrelevance, our organisation does not have to comply with normal employment legislation in the same way as civilian employers; CIPD is, in the main, concerned with this area of legislation. At the same time our processes are based upon service need, sometimes ignoring civilian normal practice, with sometimes little concern for the individuals concerned - if the service need is of a greater importance.

I know you (KG) are doing the post grad qual and I would expect that this is looking at the bigger issues, behaviours and attitudes as well as practitioner activities but what kind of a percentage of your learning is relevant to your job and what percentage is interesting and making you a better interpreter and implimenter of RAF Policy, besides.

 

[KingGuin]

but what kind of a percentage of your learning is relevant to your job and what percentage is interesting and making you a better interpreter and implimenter of RAF Policy, besides.

Certainly not the 3 hours of boring cr*p on stats I had to suffer last night and for the next 5 weeks. That aside, too early to say yet as much of it to date has replicated my degree work. I did enjoy their Conference though, lots of good gen there (especially in regard to employee reward - an area I believe we could certainly investigate) and an eye-opener.

I take your point about aspects being lost in translation from civy to Service life but there is still much to learn regardless.

 

[3wheeledtechie]

especially in regard to employee reward - an area I believe we could certainly investigate

Get yer GEMS in then!

 

[8:15fromOdium]

As an aside I am pretty sure the Admin(Sec) - or whatever the new (m/f)angled name is today - do a CIPD qual as part of their training. I must be the same as Chiefy, the CIPD qual I was looking at did seem a lot like teaching granny to suck eggs; however, if I had done it at the outset it may have been useful.